Term Limits

In one of Susan Collins most clear-cut lies to the voters of Maine, she pledged to serve only two terms and then retire from the Senate.  As someone who spent twelve years working for a Maine Senator, she had a clear idea of what could be accomplished in twelve years and she made her pledge to the voters of Maine.  Not only did she make the pledge in 1996 before entering the Senate, but she also re-iterated the pledge in 2002 after having already served a term.  She had completed her first term and had a clear vision of what she wanted to work on in her second term, and she held to her pledge.  Now that her pledge has come due, she is, very simply, breaking her promise to the voters of Maine.  She lied.  It is such a bold-faced lie, given Collins' experience as both a Senate aide and a Senator, that it is natural for the voters (and the media!) of Maine to wonder whether or not Collins ever had any intention of keeping her promise.

An interesting side note to this scenario is that Republican Senator Wayne Allard of Colorado made the identical two-term-limit pledge to the voters of Colorado, also in 1996 during his first Senate campaign.  Allard announced in January of this year that he would honor his pledge and retire from the Senate at the end of his current term, saying, "I just didn't think I could back away from the (term limits) commitment. It is a matter of integrity and keeping your commitments. I have never wavered on that," and adding that, "The people of Colorado placed their trust in me based on a promise I made to them and I am honoring that promise. In an age when promises are cast away as quickly as yesterday's newspaper, I believe a promise made should be a promise kept."  Apparently, Susan Collins is unfamiliar with Allard's sense of "integrity" or "keeping your commitments" or the belief that "a promise made should be a promise kept."

Support for President George W. Bush

This area is one of the clearest illustrations of how out of step Susan Collins is with mainstream Maine voters.  A poll of Maine voters from November 2006 sponsored by WCSH-TV Portland and run by Survey USA found that only 33% of Maine voters approve of the job George W. Bush is doing as President while an overwhelming 65% of Maine voters disapprove of Bush's job performance.  While Maine voters hold a roughly 2-to-1 disapproval of the job Bush is doing, you wouldn't know it by Susan Collins' voting.  Congressional Quarterly gauged the "Presidential Support Score" of the members of the U.S. Senate and Susan Collins scored a resounding 79 out of 100.  In other words, while only one-third of Maine voters approve of George W. Bush and nearly two-thirds disapprove of Bush, Susan Collins agrees with Bush nearly four out of every five times, or about 80% of the time.  Susan Collins is simply out of step with mainstream Maine voters.

The Iraq War

Regardless of how she has tried to position herself regarding the War in Iraq, Susan Collins has been consistent about one point: she has opposed any measure that would set a firm timetable to safely bring our troops home from Iraq.  Collins voted against HR 1591, the emergency supplemental appropriations bill to both fund the troops and set a goal withdrawal date of March 31, 2008.  Collins also supported as amendment by Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi to strip withdrawal timetable language from Iraq legislation.  Collins even voted against Senate Joint Resolution 9, urging a change in course on Iraq.  Regardless of Collins' rhetoric, she has not voted in any substantial way to indicate that she supports any course other than unfettered, unending occupation of Iraq, with no end in sight for our brave soldiers in harm's way, which one could call the George W. Bush approach to Iraq policy.

Further, beyond the content of her votes, is whom Susan Collins is supporting in the 2008 Presidential race.  Susan Collins has not only endorsed but is also serving as Maine state co-Chair for the campaign of Senator John McCain, arguably the entire Presidential field's most vocal supporter of continuing the Iraq War without any timetable for the safe return of U.S. Armed Forces.

Ethical Questions

On a number of occasions, incidents came to light that demonstrated that Susan Collins was repeatedly using taxpayer-funded Senate resources for political campaign purposes.  In August, when the Collins camp was trying to gin up a fake scandal over the Maine Democratic Party recording Collins' remarks at public events, we saw that it was Collins' taxpayer-funded Chief of Staff and Senate press office, rather than campaign staff, that were coordinating her political responses to the situation.  Also in August, it came to light that Collins' Senate office computers were being used to adjust her Wikipedia entry to appear more politically palatable.  None of this is shocking given that Collins was already caught using Senate computers for the purpose of political communication with the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign in 2004.  In September, the Collins camp was finally called out in the media for their abuses of Senate resources for political purposes.  There is unquestionably valid reason for further investigation by the Senate Ethics Committee regarding Collins' Senate office's practices regarding political activity.

Women's Rights and the Supreme Court

Susan Collins has presented herself as a pro-choice supporter of a woman's right to choose.  Despite Collins' effort to deceive voters into thinking that she would defend the reproductive rights of women, she voted to confirm the nominations to the Supreme Court of both Samuel Alito and John Roberts.  Both jurists are conservatives who clearly threaten the Constitutional right to privacy decided upon in Roe v. Wade.  In fact, this new, conservative, anti-choice majority on the Supreme Court, which Susan Collins helped install, has already begun dismantling the very reproductive freedoms that Susan Collins claims she supports.  In April of this year, the Roberts Supreme Court upheld a federal law restricting abortion by a 5-4 vote.  The Boston Globe editorial board labeled the decision "an erosion of abortion rights" which led to "taking an important medical choice away from women and doctors."  A NARAL Pro-Choice America press release stated that the "Court's ruling opens door for more political interference in personal, private medical decisions."  This erosion of abortion rights is, in part, the result of Susan Collins' support for Samuel Alito and John Roberts.  Support for this decidedly more ideologically rigid and conservative Roberts Court is, ultimately, Susan Collins' legacy on a woman's right to choose.

Further, in May of this year, the Roberts Supreme Court upheld an effective 180-day statute of limitations on filing a pay discrimination complaint, again by a narrow 5-4 vote.  This decision will severely limit women's ability to file discrimination complaints against employers for unequal wages.  And, as the New York Times noted, "As with an abortion ruling last month, this decision showed the impact of Justice Alito's presence on the court. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, whom he succeeded, would almost certainly have voted the other way, bringing the opposite outcome."  Once again, Susan Collins' support of far-right-wing jurists led to the erosion of women's rights across Maine and across America.

While a number of Democrats did vote for Roberts' confirmation, only four Democrats voted to confirm Alito (while one Republican opposed his confirmation).  Subsequently, Bloomberg News referred to Alito as "companies' No. 1 ally" and "the justice friendliest to the interests of corporations," noting that he "sided with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's largest business lobby, in 13 of 14 cases this term, more often than any of his colleagues."  So far, the Roberts-Alito Court rendered decisions that weakened the EPA's responsibility to protect endangered species, eradicated taxpayers' ability to challenge Faith-Based Initiatives, and weakened campaign finance restrictions on corporations.  Certainly, any Democratic opponent of Susan Collins would not have voted to confirm Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, making it uniquely and sadly part of Susan Collins' failed legacy.

Failures as Homeland Security Committee Chair

Prior to the Democratic Party regaining majority status in the Senate following the 2006 elections, Susan Collins served as Chair of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.  Just this past week, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) released a new report "exposing massive failures and billions wasted at Dept. of Homeland Security."  As Chair of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs during this time, Susan Collins was in a unique role to provide leadership to prevent such waste and/or oversight to investigate such waste.  She failed to do either.  And it's not for lack of encouragement.  In June of 2006, every Democratic Senator on the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs signed on to a letter pleading with Collins to hold hearings "on the billions of dollars in Iraqi reconstruction funds that have been squandered due to waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement."  Once again, however, Susan Collins was more interested in protecting George W. Bush's administration than she was in protecting Maine and the rest of America from waste and mismanagement at the Department of Homeland Security and in Iraq.

Then, there is the issue of no-bid contracts and war profiteering.  As it is Susan Collins' re-election cycle, she has paid lip service to expressing concern about this issue.  She has even gotten some press by talking tough on the issue.  But what is the real story on Susan Collins and war profiteering?  Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey has on several occasions - not once, not twice, not thrice, but at least four times - urged Collins to hold hearings on Halliburton's no-bid contracts in Iraq.  And what was Susan Collins' response?

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, chair of the Senate Governmental Affairs committee, says the panel will not be taking any action because Halliburton's contracts in Iraq already face probes by the General Accounting Office, defense auditors and the Pentagon inspector general.

Susan Collins, who disingenuously talks tough on no-bid contracts and war profiteering, won't bother to provide Senate oversight on Halliburton's contracts because the GAO and Pentagon are already poking around, allowing her to abdicate her responsibilities as Chair of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.  She was flat-out unwilling to do her job.  And why?  To protect the corporate cronies of the Bush-Cheney administration.

Additionally, it was on Senator Collins' watch that the deteriorating conditions at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center occurred, leading to the uncovering of the scandal in The Washington Post and Salon.  Had Susan Collins demonstrated the slightest modicum of leadership and exercised her oversight authority in this area, perhaps the scandal could have been avoided.  Instead, Susan Collins sat idly by as the conditions deteriorated at one of the U.S. Army's premier medical centers.  Is this the low regard in which Susan Collins holds our military veterans?

Habeas Corpus (or: Susan Collins is NOT Olympia Snowe)

In September of this year, Susan Collins decided to spit on the U.S. Constitution and vote against restoring habeas corpus rights, demonstrating once again how far to the right Collins really is.  But there is quite an interesting backstory, as The Washington Post reports:

That is why Collins was steaming mad yesterday when Snowe, without warning, switched her vote to side with Democrats to restore habeas corpus rights for terrorism suspects.

Snowe had initially backed Republican leaders by voting "nay" on the procedural motion to force a final vote. But once it became clear that the GOP had more than enough votes to win, Snowe switched her vote to "yea."

Snowe apparently did not inform her leadership of the switch, according to aides and senators familiar with the decision. Therefore, Collins never got the message, leaving her all alone.

Collins, who is facing a potentially tough reelection battle next fall against Rep. Tom Allen (D-Maine), an antiwar liberal, was visibly angry, according to eyewitnesses in the chamber's press gallery. She paced around the floor, confronting several members of the leadership.

Susan Collins cowardly relies on Olympia Snowe for political cover time and time again.  And when Snowe isn't there to prop Collins up, Collins gets awfully mad.  Further, Collins demonstrates once again that she is the polar opposite of "leadership."

Real ID Act

The Real ID Act is another scenario in which Susan Collins illustrates how much further to the political right she is compared to mainstream Maine voters.  The Real ID Act mandates that Americans use national identification cards for various aspects of social life, from opening a bank account to air travel and so on.  As CNet reported, "Both chambers of the Maine legislature approved a resolution saying the state flatly 'refuses' to force its citizens to use driver's licenses that comply with digital ID standards, which were established under the 2005 Real ID Act. It asks the U.S. Congress to repeal the law."  Despite Maine's clear opposition to the Real ID Act, Susan Collins has continued to push the legislation.  Collins proposed a two-year delay in the Act's implementation, doing nothing to address the actual concerns with the Act regarding privacy issues and civil liberties.  The American Civil Liberties Union correctly notes, "Real ID is an unfunded mandate that fails to protect privacy and could lead to rampant identity theft."  And Susan Collins is perfectly fine with that, even if both chambers of the Maine state legislature isn't.

Out-of-State Money for Use in Maine Political Activities

Americans United for Change (AUC) released a thirty-second ad criticizing Susan Collins' muddled position on Iraq and urging her to vote to end the Iraq War.  In response to the AUC ad, the Collins for Senator committee released a video retort nearly ninety seconds long.  At the 53-second-mark of the retort, Collins' response decries the AUC ad by saying "This Attack Ad is Paid for By 100% Out-of-State Money."  This response by Collins, however, is very hypocritical as Collins routinely receives out-of-state money for her own political campaigning in Maine.  In fact, OpenSecrets.org notes that only 39.5% of Susan Collins' fundraising comes from in-state, while over 60% of her funds come in from out of state!  So, while Collins decries her critics' use of out-of-state funds, she herself relies enormously on out-of-state funds herself, a rather sizable hypocrisy on Collins' part.

Conservative Senate Leadership

Following the Republican Party's return to minority party status after the 2006 elections, there were two candidates for the position of Republican Whip in the Senate: relatively moderate Tennessee Republican Lamar Alexander and far-right conservative Mississippi Republican Trent Lott.  Trent Lott had previously served as Republican Majority Leader, but stepped down from his leadership post after making racially insensitive comments that seemed to advocate for racial segregation.  Who did Susan Collins support?  Of course, she supported the far-right conservative, even after promising the relatively moderate candidate her support.  The Hill reported:

Sen. Trent Lott's (R-Miss.) stunning return to the Senate leadership was made possible by the last-minute defections of Sens. John Warner (R-Va.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) from Sen. Lamar Alexander's (R-Tenn.) rival campaign for Republican whip.

It seems that Susan Collins is content not just lying to Maine voters but also to her fellow Republican Senators.  If Susan Collins makes you a promise, don't count on her keeping it.

Conclusion and Action Items

From unbending allegiance to the far-right wing of the Republican Party and seemingly blind faith in the failing Bush administration, to individual issues including Iraq, reproductive rights, Real ID, waste and mismanagement at Homeland Security, war profiteering, habeas corpus, and the Walter Reed scandal, to whether or not she should even be running for re-election in 2008, Susan Collins has established time and time again that she is: A) dishonest, hypocritical, and very comfortable breaking promises; B) far out of step with mainstream Maine voters; and C) much further to the political right than her reputation would suggest.

Now that you're undoubtedly worked up over what a horrible Senator Susan Collins is, what can you do?
1) Contribute whatever you can to Congressman Tom Allen's campaign to unseat Collins.
2a) Encourage the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate Collins' Senate office's inappropriate political activity as noted above.  Their phone number is 202-224-2981.
2b) Encourage Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) to call for a Senate Ethics Committee investigation into Collins' Senate office's inappropriate political activity.  Their phone number is 202-408-5565 or you can submit a tip to their CREW Tipline.
3) Write a letter to the editor of any of Maine's numerous print media outlets explaining your disgust with Susan Collins' failure as a Senator.

For daily news and updates on the U.S. Senate races around the country in 2008, check out Senate 2008 Guru: Following the Races.